4 ms·
i thought the harsh sentencing was because he tried to pay a hitman to kill 5 people? edit: apparently the murder charges were dropped[0] but the evidence that
by modzu 7y ago
i thought the harsh sentencing was because he tried to pay a hitman to kill 5 people?
edit: apparently the murder charges were dropped[0] but the evidence that he hired a hitman was deemed "unambiguous" and factored into his sentencing[1]
these facts should probably be acknowledged, even if disputed, on the freeross page, otherwise it reads like propaganda.
a related and interesting twist: it was an fbi informant he paid to be his hitman, who staged the murders. so nobody actually died, even though he believed they did. crazy.
[0] http://www.dailydot.com/crime/silk-road-murder-charges-ross-ulbricht/ http://www.dailydot.com/crime/silk-road-murder-charges-ross-...
[1] https://freeross.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sentencing_2015-May-29.pdf https://freeross.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Sentencing_2...
- fru2013 7y agoThe murder charges were also mentioned during the appeal. IANAL but listening to it sounds like it played a role in denying his appeal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2nd_Cir._oral_argument._15-1815_US_v_Ulbricht.ogv https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2nd_Cir._oral_argument._1...
- anbop 7y agoHe forgot the cardinal rule of hiring a hitman... don’t. Your probability of talking to the police or a buffoon who will get you caught is close to 100%. Actual hit men work for established criminal organizations, and don’t look on Craigslist for freelance gigs.
- modzu 7y agoone has to wonder how much the fbi was involved in entrapment here
- givinguflac 7y agoAgreed. Just about every “foiled terror plot” in the 00’s were people coerced into the action and provided instructions if not materials for carrying it out by the FBI.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoIt goes back much farther than that. It took a sawed off shotgun, a bunch of crispy children and a dude with a box truck to convince them to only entrap minorities. The FBI and federal law enforcement more broadly has a long sad history of misdeeds.
- dragonsngoblins 7y ago> It goes back much farther than that. It took a sawed off shotgun, a bunch of crispy children and a dude with a box truck to convince them to only entrap minorities. I feel like there is a story there, could you please provide a little more info?
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoThe sawed off shotgun is a reference to Ruby Ridge The crispy children is a reference to the Waco siege. The box truck is a reference to the Oklahoma City bombing. If you choose to research those first two terms they will lead you down a very deep and dark rabbit hole of government misdeeds. You've been warned.
- ceejayoz 7y agoSting operations are not entrapment. Entrapment requires coercion by the police to push you into something you wouldn't have otherwise done. Selling drugs to an undercover cop? Not entrapment. Selling drugs to an undercover cop because they said they'd kill your family if you don't get them some drugs? Entrapment.
- futureastronaut 7y agoThere have been "sting operations" where cops offered somebody a ridiculous low price on some drugs, then busted them for going for it. Easy to get caught trafficking several kilos of coke when you paid $100 a kilo. Sounds like entrapment to me though.
- ceejayoz 7y agoThat's not entrapment, at least not in the USA. A normal law abiding person doesn't deal cocaine even if it's really cheap.
- futureastronaut 7y agoA normal wealthy person, maybe. To many people, an offer like that is a ticket out of poverty.
- ceejayoz 7y agoSo's stealing an unattended bag of money off the back of an armored truck. Still criminal; still not a coerced act.
- dragonsngoblins 7y agoI mean, if I'm a regular user and I can afford and obtain a big supply for 1/10th the going rate I'd seriously consider that, even without an interest for selling it on. This would be true of any shelf stable product I use regularly and could effectively store
- jMyles 7y agoIf the government wanted to adjudicate that matter - for sentencing or any other purpose - it needed to charge him with those crimes. It didn't do that, precisely because the evidence is flimsy and most of us don't believe most of it for a second. The government's decision to use this "evidence" only as a public relations tool to justify an insane sentence reads like a fascist tendency, not the actions of the justice system in a free country. Free Ross.